U.S. v. USA Waste Services, 1999 U.S. District Lexis 17577 (N.D. OH, 1999)
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Plaintiff States sought to enjoin the merger agreement between USA Waste Services, Inc. (USA Waste) and Waste Management, Inc. (WMI), arguing that such a merger would substantially lessen the competition in the waste disposal and commercial waste hauling business.
In Re: Insurance Antitrust Litigation, 938 F.2d 919, 1991-1 Trade Cases (CCH) & 69,460
Plaintiff States sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant reinsurers, brokers and trade organizations conspired to reduce the availability to public entities of commercial general liability insurance during the mid-1980s.
In re Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation, MDL-150; 1992-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 69,925 (C.D. Cal. 1992)
In 1973, The States of Florida and Connecticut sued several named petroleum companies in each individual state’s federal court. The States alleged that the companies conspired to raise or stabilize prices for refined oil products and they continually engaged in the mutual exchange of pricing and price-related information. Further, the States alleged that the Defendants conspired to create an artificial scarcity of crude and refined oil and that the oil companies conspired not to compete in bidding on plaintiffs annual bulk sale petroleum supply contracts. California, Arizona, Washington and Oregon also sued
In re Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litigation, 2001-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) & 73,150
Plaintiff States sought damages and injunctive relief against the three major contact lens makers and the American Optometric Association. The States alleged that defendants conspired to cut mail order companies and pharmacies out of the market for replacement contact lenses.
Colorado, et al. v. Airline Tariff Pub. Co.; No. 1:90-CV-2485-MHS and MDL No. 861 (N.D. Georgia) (October 1994)
Settlement providing for discounted ticket prices for state and local government agency air travel reached between Plaintiff States and certain airlines over price-fixing scheme.
New York et al. v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc., Roche Vitamin, Inc.; Aventis Animal Nutrition S.A.; Daiichi Pharmaceutical Co. LTD; Eisai Co, LTD; Takeda Chemical Industries, Ltd; BASF Corporation (master case)
In various state court filings around the country, Plaintiff States alleged that Defendants conspired to set the prices of vitamins that go into various products. The exemplar case upon which all other settlements were ultimately based was filed in the District of Columbia in conjunction with various private class actions.
Florida ex rel. Butterworth v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation, et al. No. MDL 1189 (N.D. Fla 2000)
States sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that defendant paper companies conspired to fix prices for commercial tissue, in violation of state and federal antitrust law.
In re Towne BMW, In re Holtz House of Vehicles, Inc.
Alleged collusion, market allocation, and price-fixing between dealers of BMW automobiles in upstate New York.
New York v. Urethane Applicators, Inc.; No. Cv 94 2705 (E.D.N.Y.).
New York sued several roofing contractors on behalf of the state and its political subdivisions, including the Connetquot Central School District on Long Island, for injunctive relief, civil penalties and treble damages, alleging bid-rigging and market allocation.
New York v. Daicel Chemical Industries et al, No. 403878/02 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty., Sept. 24, 2004)
Charges seventeen-year international conspiracy to fix the price of sorbates, a preservative used in many foods and beverages.
